3U 


ECONOMIC  TRACTS.     No.  XXVI. 


■.^;- 


.'■,■-■    < 


The  Liquor  Question 
H#'    />^  Politics 


■("■<■••?• 


;..^.. 


<    > 


By    GEORGE    ILES 


.V';.'l 


•^V\ 


iif,:' ■  i    t-v. 


/    rf  *y ; 


>•' 


.  -.,1 


■:^ 


".i 


i>  •     --■■>.        .■ 


'V  ^■.: 


NEW   YORK 


I;    '  . 


THE  SOCIETY   FOR   POLITICAL   EDUCATION         ■"  -  ]( 


330     PEARL    STREET 
1889 


FIFTEEN    CENTS. 


*   "^     The  Society  for  Political  Education. 

{ORGANIZED  iSSo.) 

OBJECTS. — The  Society  was  organized  by  citizens  who  believe  that  the  S|UC- 
cess  of  our  government  depends  on  the  active  political  influence  of  educated  intelli- 
gence, and  that  parties  are  means,  not  ends.  The.growing  tendency  of  government 
to  enlarge  its  sphere,  and  the  demands  constantly  made  to  increase  the  power  and 
responsibility  of  the  State,  make  political  education  more  than  ever  a  supreme 
necessity  for  the  just  limitation  and  right  guidance  of  governmental  authority. 
Entirely  non  partisan  in  its  organization,  the  one  aim  of  the  Society  is  the  awakening 
of  an  intelligent  interest  in  government  methods  and  purposes,  that  political  moral- 
ity may  be  promoted  and  the  abuses  of  parties  restrained.  Cv    . 

Among  its  organizers  are  numbered  Democrats,  Republicans,  and  Independents, 
who  differ  among  themselves  as  to  which  party  is  best  fitted  to  conduct  the  govern- 
ment, but  who  are  in  the  main  agreed  as  to  the  following  propositions  : 

The  right  of  each  citizen  to  his  free  voice  Sound  currency  must  have  a  metal  basis,  and 

and   vote  must  be  upheld,  and  every  possible  all   paper  money  must   be  convertible  on  <*e^ 

safeguard  must  be  employed  to  assure  independ-  roand. 

ence  of  vote.  Labor  has  a  right  to  the  highest  wages  it  can 

Office- holders  must  not  control  the  suffrage.  earn,  unhindered  by  public  or  private  tyranny. 

The  office  should  seek  the  man,  and  not  the  Trade  has  a  right  to  the  freest  scope,  unfet- 

man  the  office.  tered   by  taxes, '  except    for   governmt        ex- 

,  Public  pervice,  in  business  positions,  should  penses. 

depend  solely  on  fitness  and  good  behavior.  Corporations  must  be  restricted  from  abvKse 

The  crimes  of  bribery  and  corruption  must  of  privilege, 

be  relentlessly  punished.  Neither  the  public  money  nor  the  people's 

Local  issues  should  be  independent  of  na-  land  must  be  used  to  subsidize  private  enter- 

tional  parties.  prise. 

Coins   made   unlimited    legal    tender   must  A  public  opinion,  wholesome  and  active,  un- 

posseRs   their  face  value  ais  metal  in  the  ntiar-  hampered  by  machine  controlj  is  the  truesafe- 

Icets  of  the  world.  guard  of  popular  institutions. 

All  members  of  the  Society  are  not,  however,  required  to  endorse  the  above. 

METHODS. — The  Society  carries  out  its  objects  by  submitting  from  time  to 
time  to  its  members  lists  of  books  which  it  regards  as  desirable  reading  on  current 
political  and  economic  questions  ;  by  selecting  courses  of  reading  for  its  members  ; 
by  supplying  the  books  so  selected  at  the  smallest  possible  advance  beyond  actual 
cost ;  by  furnishing  and  circulating  at  a  low  price  sound  economic  and  political 
literature  in  maintenance  and  illustration  of  the  principles  above  announced  as 
constituting  the  basis  of  its  organization  ;  and  by  assisting  in  the  formation  of  read- 
ing and  corresponding  circles  and  clubs  for  discussing  social,  political,  and  economic 
questions. 

It  is  suggested  that  branch  organizations  be  formed  wherever  it  is  possible  (and 
especially  in  colleges)  to  carry  out  the  intentions  of  the  Society.  Any  person  who 
will  form  a  Club  of  ten  persons,  each  of  whom  shall  be  an  active  member  of  this 
Society,  will  be  entitled  to  a  set  of  the  tracts  issued  for  the  current  year. 

MEMBERSHIP. — Any  person  who  will  send  one  dollar  to  the  Secretary  be- 
comes an  active  member  and  is  entitled  to  receive  all  the  tracts  issued  by  the  Society 
during  any  one  year.  In  order  to  extend  the  usefulness  of  the  Society,  a  t-^^-t^^^ra/iV^ 
membership  has  been  established  for  such  persons  as  wish  to  promote  political  ard 
economic  education.  The  annual  fee  of  a  co-operative  member  is  $5.00,  which  en- 
titles the  member  to  all  tracts  of  the  Society  for  the  current  year,  and  also  to  name 
five  persons  who  will  have  all  the  privileges  of  active  members. 

Letters  of  inquiry  shoukl  enclose  return  postage. 

Money  should  be  sent  by  draft,  postal  order,  or  registered  letter  to  the  Secretary. 

R.  R.  BowKER,  Chairman.  Geo.  Iles,  Secretary, 

E.  M.  Shepard,  Treasurer.  330  Pearl  Str<  -t,  New  York. 


ECONOMIC  TRACTS.     No.  XX ri. 


.«,f.-  '.;■ 


The  Liquor  Question 
in  Politics  - 


By    GEORGE    ILES 


•.^;:.*'    "   •  -  ""  • 


• '  • ' '  -      t. 


J  • 

•  •   •  . 


NEW   YORK 
THE  SOCIETY   FOR  POLITICAL   EDUCATION 
..     .   ,  330     PEARL    STREET 

;   C:  1889 


^ 


The  Liquor  Question  in  Politics. 


The  term  liquor  being  for  convenience'  sake  used  to  include 
not  only  distilled  alcoholic  stimulants,  but  also  wine,  ale,  and 
beer,  the  liquor  question  fills  two  places  in  politics.  First,  in  so 
far  as  the  liquor  business  is  organized  or  represented  as  a  politi- 
cal interest  to  protect  or  promote  itself.  Second,  in  so  far  as  this 
business  is  the  subject  of  legislation  for  its  special  taxation,  re- 
striction, or  suppression.  As  the  extremely  variable  element 
of  retail  profit  enters  into  estimates,  it  is  impossible  to  say  ex- 
actly how  much  the  nation's  annual  outlay  for  liquor  is.  It  is 
certainly  not  less  than  a  thousand  million  dollars,  and  may  be 
even  a  fifth  more.  'Ihe  vast  business  which  this  outlay  repre- 
sents is  highly  organized  :  the  "trust"  system  which  has  con- 
solidated so  many  other  branches  of  manufacture  has  been 
extended  to  whiskey  ;  agreements  as  to  wages  and  prices  have 
drawn  together  for  concerted  action  the  majority  of  brewers  in 
the  United  States.  There  are  throu;^hout  the  Union  numerous 
associations  not  only  of  distillers  and  brewers,  but  also  of  wine- 
producers,  liquor-dealers,  and  saloon-keepers,  supporting  trade 
journals  of  large  circulation,  maintaining  a  literary  bureau,  and 
employing  special  counsel  to  watch  State  and  national  law- 
making in  their  behalf. 

New  York  City  as  the  nation's  metropolis  presents  the  de- 
velopments of  the  liquor  trade  in  their  highest  form.  On  De- 
cember 31,  1888,  there  were  7809  places  in  the  city  licensed  to 
sell  liquor  to  be  drank  on  the  premises.  In  addition  there  were 
971  stores  licensed  to  sell  liquor  not  to  be  drank  on  the  premises. 
Assuming  the  city's  population  to  be  1,500,000,  there  was  one 


nfH  m 


i  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

license  to  every  171  inhabitants.  The  receipts  for  licenses  dur- 
ing i888  were  $1,430,420,  an  average  of  $162.  Within  recent 
years  in  New  York,  as  elsewhere  in  the  United  States,  a  form  of 
enterprise  common  among  European  brewers  has  been  adopted 
with  the  effect  of  consolidating  an  important  branch  of  the 
liquor  interest.  This  enterprise  is  the  establishment  of  saloon- 
keepers in  business  by  wealthy  brewers,  who  fit  up  premises 
attractively  and  take  chattel  mortgages  to  secure  their  invest- 
ment. This  ensures  the  brewers  an  enlarged  tiicle  of  custom 
without  the  ordinary  expense  of  solicitation,  and  binds  the 
political  interest  of  thousands  of  saloon-keepers  by  the  strong 
cord  of  debt.  Mr.  Robert  Graham  has  ascertained  that  during 
the  year  ending  October  1888, 4710  chattel  mortgages  on  saloon 
fixtures  were  recorded,  of  a  total  value  of  $4,959,578,  the  greater 
proportion  of  them  being  in  favor  of  brewers  and  wholesale  wine 
and  liquor  firms.  A  partial  list  of  these  mortgages,  published 
by  Mr.  Graham,  shows  twenty  brewing  firms  to  have  filed 
1908  liens,  aggregating  $1,702,136  in  amount.  How  important 
a  part  saloons  play  as  rallying  centres  of  political  activity  has 
also  been  shown  by  the  same  writer  in  one  of  the  Church  Tem- 
perance Society's  pamphlets.  Out  of  1002  primary  and  other 
political  meetings  which  preceded  the  elections  of  November, 
1884,  719  were  held  in  saloons  or  next  door  to  them.  In  most 
of  the  Assembly  Districts  it  is  difificult  to  find  a  small  hall  not 
connected  with  a  saloon,  for  the  profit  arising  from  such  con- 
nection forbids  the  competition  of  a  hall  free  from  saloon  con- 
trol. Conservative  men  familiar  with  the  politics  of  New  York 
City  estimate  the  liquor  vote  at  40,000,  or  one-seventh  of  the 
whole,  a  vote  quite  sufficient  to  turn  the  scale  in  ordinary  con- 
tests, especially  as  the  liquor  interest  usually  allies  itself  with  one 
of  the  two  great  national  parties,  secure  of  its  own  ordinary  and 
regular  party  following.  That  40,000  is  a  moderate  estimate  of 
the  liquor  vote  is  evident  when  we  remember  that  of  the  7391 
saloons  in  the  city  many  are  the  headquarters  of  clubs,  numer- 


THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS,  3 

ous  in  membership,  and  that  many  more  are  practically  clubs 
whose  frequenters  are  on  terms  of  friendship  and  good-will  with 
the  proprietors.  Mr.  Theodore  Roosevelt  in  the  Century^  and 
Mr.  Birnest  H.  Crosby  in  the  Forum,  have  drawn  attention  to 
the  enormous  and  growing  political  influence  of  liquor-dealers 
in  New  York  City.  Several  of  their  number  sit  in  the  Legisla- 
ture at  Albany. 

What  is  true  of  New  York  City  is  substantially  true  of  the 
country   at   large.     Liquor   is  an   organization  pervasive  and 

, \.  thorough,  formed  to  exert  all  the  political  power  it  can  for  its 

own  good,  and  as  such  is  one  of  the  strongest  elements  in  Ameri- 
can politics,  if  indeed  it  be  not  the  very  strongest.     The  liquor 
trade  has  one  important  advantage  over  most  others  active  in 
,  the  political  sphere — as  a  lucrative  trade  it  has  command  of 

liberal  subscriptions,  and  many  of  the  men  engaged  in  it  have 
leisure  wherein  to  advance  political  aims.  That  the  liquor  vote 
has  already  decided  a  presidential  election  is  claimed  by  Mr. 
Gallus  Thomann,  head  of  the  Literary  Bureau  of  the  United 
States  Brewers'  Association.  He  asserts  that  Mr.  Blaine's  defeat 
in  1884  is  chargeable  to  his  ambiguous  attitude  toward  Prohi- 
bition in  Maine. 

So  much  then  for  the  phase  of  organization  for  political  in- 
fluence which  this  immense  business  interest  presents.  We  now 
pass  to  some  consideration  of  the  place  it  occupies  as  the  sub- 
ject in  legislation  of  special  taxation,  restriction,  or  suppression. 
And  here  it  may  be  asked.  Are  not  the  men  engaged  in  the 
liquor  trade  prosecuting  a  legitimate  business  ?  Do  they  not 
cater  to  an  almost  universal  demand  for  what  its  users  deem  a 
luxury  or  a  necessity  ?  Do  they  employ  force  or  fraud  to  oblige 
any  one  to  buy  from  them  ?  Why  then  should  laws  be  enacted  to 
restrict  or  suppress  this  business  rather  than  any  other  ?  What 
though  the  liquor  trades  be  organized  for  the  defence  or  further- 

W  ance  of  their  interests,  is  not  the  like  the  case  with  scores  of  other 

trades,  and  pre-eminently  so  with  workingmen  ?    And  if  organ- 


4'  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

izations  of  the  liquor  trades  do  employ  their  power  in  political 
channels,  is  not  this  course  thrust  upon  them  by  the  incessant  po- 
litical activity  of  their  declared  enemies  ?  And  quite  outside  the 
ranks  of  the  liquor  party  there  are  advocates  of  personal  liberty 
who  ask,  While  men  are  free  to  use  liquor  or  to  leave  it  alone, 
why  should  there  be  any  interference  by  a  State  paternalism  ? 
Holding  freedom  with  incidental  drunkenness  to  be  preferable 
to  sobriety  due  to  restraint,  they  declare  suffering  to  be  the 
best  moral  educator,  and  maintain  that  intemperance  is  a  vice 
inevitable  in  the  present  comparatively  low  development  of 
human  character  and  imperfect  adiii)tation  of  the  individual  to 
social  conditions.  It  is  averred  by  such  advocates  of  freedom 
that  excessive  indulgence  in  alcoholic  stimulants  carries  with  it 
so  weighty  a  social  condemnation,  inflicts  so  many  grievous 
natural  penalties,  that  where  all  the  better  motives  for  influen- 
cing conduct  fail,  it  is  folly  to  resort  to  the  worse.  They  further 
declare  that  restrictive  or  suppressive  liquor  laws  proceed  on  the 
tacit  assuinption  that  a  large  element  in  the  community  is  unfit 
for  liberty,  and  should  therefore  remain  in  the  moral  guard- 
ianship of  those  who  deem  themselves  its  superiors  or  spon- 
sors. They  regard  it  as  an  illegitimate  stretch  of  law  when 
in  addition  to  overt  acts  of  offence,  acts  which  may  or  may  not 
lead  to  offence  are  made  the  subject  of  punitive  legislation.  If 
the  community  has  a  vested  interest  with  respect  to  the  indi- 
vidual's use  of  alcohol,  assuming  such  use  to  be  at  times  harm- 
ful, where,  they  ask,  will  the  conservation  of  similar  vested 
interests  in  conduct  end  ?  And  how,  practically,  shall  this 
conservation  be  given  effect  ?  A  large  proportion  of  the  Ameri- 
can people,  perhaps  a  majority,  believe  that  religious  teaching 
lies  at  the  base  of  morality;  shall  this  view  be  enforced  after  the 
manner  of  the  inquisitors  of  old?  If  not,  then  on  the  same 
ground,  is  it  not  better  frankly  to  admit  that  certain  kinds  of 
wrong-doing  are  best  left  alone  by  the  policeman  and  the 
courts — best  limit  themselves  when  so  left  alone  ? 


THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  5 

There  are  other  critics  of  anti-liquor  legislation  besides  the 
philosophic  defenders  of  freedom  and  the  sentinels  guarding  the 
vested  interests  of  liquor — a  third  c'ass,  mainly  philanthropic  in 
motive  and  having  personal  knowledge  of  the  comparatively 
weak  and  unfortunate  elements  of  our  population.  These 
people  regard  legislation  as  one  of  the  least  effective  remedies 
for  the  evils  caused  by  intemperance.  'I'hey  deem  the  licjuor 
habit  to  be  not  only  a  prolific  cause  of  mischief,  but  at  the  same 
time  the  symptom  of  moral  and  social  maladies  which  require 
cure  if  the  craving  for  drink  is  to  be  banished.  They  see  that 
the  saloon  is  attractive  because  the  home  is  often  repellent — 
narrow,  noisy,  and  mean  ;  its  air  bad,  its  meals  wretched,  its 
surroundings  unwholesome.  To  make  homes  what  they  should 
be,  even  on  a  simply  material  plane,  not  only  involves  many 
educational  reforms  but  a  vastly  increased  sense  of  responsi- 
bility among  the  strong  and  fortunate  toward  those  whose  wants 
are  so  much  like  their  own,  but  whose  ability  or  possessions 
fall  so  far  short  of  theirs.  And  going  from  the  home  to  the 
workshop  these  critics  there  find  a  new  cause  for  the  craving 
for  stimulants — the  tendency  to  an  increased  monotony  of  toil 
among  factory  and  other  operatives.  When  a  limited  chain  of 
nerves,  muscles,  and  brain-cells  are  overworked  and  all  the  rest 
of  the  system  is  idle,  it  is  held  that  the  disturbed  physiological 
balance  sharpens  the  appetite  for  just  such  an  excitant  as 
alcohol.  Hence  these  critics  advocate  cheap  public  amusements 
of  a  wholesome  kind,  orchestral  concerts  and  the  like  ;  they 
lament  the  fact  that  in  most  cities  of  the  Union  working  people 
on  the  one  day  they  are  free  from  toil  cannot  gain  admission  to 
art  collections,  public  libraries,  and  other  sources  of  refined 
pleasure.  They  are  active  in  aid  of  all  enterprises  which  com- 
pete with  the  saloon  by  providing  meals  and  club  attractions  at 
small  charges — enterprises  such  as  the  English  coffee-houses, 
which  have  proved  profitable  whilst  quite  free  from  religious  or 
philanthropic  patronage,     Such  ar^  the  views  of  reformers  who 


6  THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

hold  to  the  potency  of  circumstances  in  shaping  conduct,  who 
beUeve  that  to  improve  conditions  is  to  improve  character. 
Philanthropists  there  are  who  form  a  small  school  of  what  may 
be  called  individualistic  reform.  They  are  of  opinion  that  in 
the  anti-liquor  agitation  rather  too  much  has  been  made  of  the 
responsibility  of  the  caloon-keeper  and  too  little  of  that  of  his 
patron,  without  whose  free  and  unconstrained  custom  the  saloon 
would  disappear.  They  deem  the  best  method  of  dealing  with 
a  victim  of  the  alcohol  habit  to  be  by  appealing  to  his  self-re- 
spect and  self-control.  That  appeal  a  failure,  they  expect  little 
from  legal  enactments,  the  agitation  for  which  they  believe  ab- 
sorbs much  activity  which  could  be  more  usefully  applied. 

All  this  and  much  more  to  the  same  effect  has  been  said  again 
and  again,  yet  the  great  body  of  the  American  people  are  con. 
vinced  that  the  liquor  trafific  is  a  proper  subject  for  legislative 
restriction  or  suppression.  The  popular  idea  seems  to  be  that 
the  State  is  the  people  organized  to  guard  and  advance  its  best 
interests,  and  among  the  immense  mass  of  laws  passed  with  this 
intent,  no  class  is  larger  or  more  interesting  than  liquor  laws. 
The  people  who  of  ail  others  highest  uphold  the  banner  of 
liberty  justify  their  course  in  this  matter  chiefly  on  three 
grounds  :  That  the  rule  of  freedom  which  obliges  an  individual 
to  refrain  from  encroaching  on  the  like  freedom  of  others  is 
constantly  broken  by  victims  of  the  liquor  habit,  and  hence  the 
liquor  trade  is  properly  amenable  to  restraint.  Tacitly  held,  or 
explicitly  stated,  the  popular  conviction  is  that  happiness  is  the 
main  thing,  for  which  freedom  is  but  a  condition  ;  however 
variously  happiness  may  be  defined,  it  is  maintained  to  be  very 
generally  imperilled  and  curtailed  by  intemperance,  which  makes 
the  catering  thereto  a  trade  to  be  restricted  or  abolished.  Poi- 
sons, although  an  essential  portion  of  materia  medica,  are  strictly 
regulated  as  to  sale.  Regulation  as  definite,  if  less  stringent,  is 
held  to  be  legitimate  with  regard  to  the  sale  of  liquor.  Sec- 
ond, it  is  declared  that  the  commercial  interest  in  liquor  is  ag- 


THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  1 

gressive,  constantly  seeking  to  extend  its  bounds,  regardless  of 
resulting  mischief.  Third,  since  public  revenue  must  be  raised, 
it  is  deemed  just  to  levy  taxQs  which  incidentally  abate  the  use 
of  a  costly  and  injurious  article.  Of  the  organizations  formed 
to  give  these  convictions  effect,  the  most  worthy  of  note  are  those 
of  the  Prohibitionists  and  the  advocates  of  High  License.  Let 
their  respective  positions  be  stated  : 

The  Prohibition  party  contend  that  it  is  not  moderate  drink- 
ing but  the  excess  to  which  it  leads  that  sustains  the  liquor 
trade  ;  that  this  excessive  indulgence  is  the  direct  or  indirect 
cause  of  at  least  half  the  crime,  pauperism,  idiocy,  and  lunacy 
in  the  nation  ;  that  it  is  everywhere  and  always  leading  to  in- 
vasion of  the  freedom  and  other  rights  of  innocent  persons,  to 
an  extent  so  grievous  as  to  warrant  legal  repression.  They  re- 
mark that  whereas  with  necessities  the  demand  creates  the  supply, 
the  reverse  is  true  of  luxuries,  the  supply  creates  the  demand 
A  load  of  fruit  taken  through  a  city  street  is  quickly  bought  by 
people  whose  demand  is  aroused  by  seeing  the  fruit.  So,  it  is 
claimed,  the  mere  existence  of  saloons  provokes  patronage  of 
them,  even  when  the  liquor  habit  is  weak,  especially  where  the 
American  custom  of  treating  prevails.  Again,  it  is  urged, 
alcoholic  mdulgence  has  peculiar  power  to  enfeeble  a  will  already 
weak.  A  victim  first  drawn  by  a  thread  of  appetite  soon  finds 
himself  in  the  coil  of  a  rope  binding  him  to  degraded  slavery. 
Prohibitionists  declare  that  saloon-keepers  are  not  content  with 
a  passive  offering  of  their  wares,  but  have  elaborated  a  system 
of  lures  and  enticements  with  intent  to  encourage  drinking 
habits.  They  point  to  bars  displaying  voluptuous  pictures,  pro- 
viding the  principal  attractions  of  clubs,  bowhng-alleys,  billiard- 
rooms,  free  music,  and  newspapers.  They  point  to  free-lunch 
counters  laden  with  thirst-creating  viands,  and  assert  that  a 
considerable  proportion  of  restaurants  are  in  themselves  un- 
profitable and  are  conducted  simply  as  adjuncts  to  bars.  They 
aver  that  very  generally  liquors  are  chemically  treated,  not  only 


8  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

for  purposes  of  counterfeit,  but  to  conceal  newness  or  to  fasten 
the  liquor  appetite  upon  liquor  users.  They  declare  that  a 
noxious  business  like  this,  so  energetically,  seductively,  and  un- 
scrupulously managed,  not  seldom  allied  with  the  brothel  and 
the  gambling- house,  is  a  source  of  public  demoralization  which 
It  would  be  worse  than  weakness  to  tolerate.  They  reply  to  the 
arguments  of  the  advocates  of  liberty,  that  their  plea  is  dis- 
credited by  being  echoed  by  men  who  want  freedom  to  do  evil 
that  they  may  reap  pecuniary  gain;  that  as  freedom  is  limited 
by  obligations  which  drinkers  ignore,  they  are  justified  in  oppos- 
ing any  man's  right  to  become  a  drunkard  or  to  make  drunk- 
ards. When  it  is  objected  that  prohibitory  laws  are  enforced 
with  great  difficulty  or  altogether  fail  of  enforcement,  it  is 
maintained  that  even  in  the  degree  in  which  enforcement  obtains, 
these  laws  are  highly  beneficial;  that  laws  are  not  passed  for 
men  morally  developed  to  the  point  of  obeying  them  ;  that  it  is 
the  fear  of  penalties  threatened  rather  than  punishment  endured 
that  deters  from  transgression.  To  the  question,  *'  Does  prohi- 
bition prohibit  ?  "  they  retort,  "  Does  regulation  regulate  ?  "  It 
is  claimed  that  law  is  a  powerful  educator,  and  that  placing  liquor 
under  a  legal  ban  in  many  sections  of  the  Union  has  had  much 
to  do  with  the  advance  of  teetotal  sentiment  within  recent  years 
throughout  the  country  ;  that  where  public  opinion  is  in  favor 
of  prohibitory  law,  although  topers  may  continue  their  indul- 
gences, not  only  are  the  young  saved  from  the  liquor  habit,  but 
many  who  are  already  slightly  addicted  to  the  use  of  intoxi- 
cants may  also  be  reclaimed. 

Believing  liquor  and  the  traffic  in  it  to  be  wholly  evil,  the 
Prohibitionists  are  strenuously  opposed  to  granting  any  form  of 
license,  declaring  it  to  be  folly  to  license  men  to  make  drunk- 
ards, hire  officers  to  arrest  these  drunkards,  and  erect  prisons 
to  instruct  them  not  to  drink.  They  would  sternly  refuse  to 
legitimize  by  any  governmental  recognition  a  trade  which  they 
consider  wrong  absolutely.     Their  aim  is  suppression  and  out- 


THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  9 

lawry,  rather  than  prohibition,  of  manufacture  as  well  as  sale, 
and  throughout  the  whole  extent  of  the  Union.  For  with  less 
than  national  extirpation  they  see  that  prohibition  within  a  State 
is  defeated  by  liberty  of  importation  from  non-prohibitory  States 
and  foreign  countries,  as  this  liberty  carries  with  it  the  right  of 
sale.  The  stand  taken  by  the  Prohibitionists  with  respect  to 
vested  interests  impaired  or  destroyed  by  suppressive  legislation 
is  worthy  of  note.  In  terminating  licenses  for  the  manufacture 
or  sale  of  liquor  they  would  entertain"  no  claim  for  damages, 
holding  that  an  annual  license  has  no  warranty  of  renewal. 
Moreover,  that  as  the  liquor  traffic  is  a  crime,  and  crimes  forfeit 
rights,  no  compensation  for  loss  sliould  ever  follow  suppression. 
There  have  been  many  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Courts  of 
the  various  States  bearing  on  prohibition  ;  more  important,  how- 
ever, than  any  of  these  was  the  decision  rendered  by  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States,  on  December  5,  1887,  in  the  cases 
of  Peter  Mugler  vs.  the  State  of  Kansas  (which  State  had 
adopted  prohibition  in  its  Constitution)  and  the  State  of  Kansas 
vs.  Ziebold  &  Hagelin.  The  essence  of  the  decision  is  here 
given  : 

"  Keeping  in  view  the  principles  governing  the  relations  of  the  judicial 
and  legislative  departments  of  Governmenl.  with  each  other,  it  is  difficult 
to  perceive  any  ground  for  the  judiciary  to  declare  that  the  prohibition 
by  Kansas  of  the  manufacture  or  sale  within  her  limits  of  intoxicating 
liquors  for  general  use  there  ao  a  bev.  rage,  is  not  fairly  adapted  to  the  end 
of  protecting  the  community  agaimt  the  evils  which  confessedly  result 
from  the  excessive  use  of  ardent  spirits.  There  is  here  no  justification 
for  holding  that  the  State,  under  the  guise  merely  of  police  regulations, 
is  aiming  to  deprive  the  citizen  of  his  constitutional  rights;  for  we  cannot 
shut  out  of  view  the  fact,  within  the  knowledge  of  all,  that  the  public 
health,  the  public  morals,  and  the  public  safety  may  be  endangered  by  the 
general  use  of  intoxicating  drinks;  nor  the  fact,  established  by  statistics 
accessible  to  every  one,  that  the  disorder,  pauperism,  and  crime  prevalent 
in  the  country  are  in  some  degree  at  least  traceable  to  this  evil. 

"  Personal  liberty,  or  the  right  to  manufacture  beer  or  other  intoxicat- 
ing drinks  for  one's  own  use,  must  give  way  where  it  conflicts  with  the 


lO  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

rights  of  others.  In  other  words,  '  The  Government  may  r>;quire  each 
citizen  to  so  conduct  himself  and  so  use  his  own  property  as  not  unneces- 
sarily to  injure  another.' 

"The  Legislature,  and  not  the  individual,  io  the  proper  judge  to  de- 
termine whether  society  will  be  injuriously  affected  by  the  manufacture  of 
particular  articles  of  drink  for  the  maker's  own  use. 

"  The  general  use  ol  intoxicating  drinks  is  an  evil  to  which  the  idleness, 
disorder,  pauperism,  and  crime  existing  in  this  country  are  in  some  de- 
gree, at  least,  traceable. 

"  To  prevent  the  evils  to  society  caused  by  intemperance  it  is  a  proper 
exercise  of  the  police  power  of  a  State  for  a  Legislature  to  even  prohibit 
the  manufacture  of  intoxicating  drinks  for  the  maker's  own  use. 

"  A  State  cannot  be  handicapped  in  its  efforts  to  protect  society  from  a 
baneful  business  by  any  promises  of  immunity  which  the  Legislature  may 
have  made,  though  based  on  a  valuable  consideration.  And  this  is  true, 
notwithstanding  the  Federal  Constitution  expressly  forbids  a  State  from 
passing  any  '  law  impairing  the  obligation  of  contracts.' 

"  A  lawful  occupation  of  yesterday  may  become  a  criminal  occupation 
of  to-day,  by  reason  of  the  progress  of  government  to  a  higher  standard 
of  public  morality  and  virtue. 

"  A  State  may  even  prohibit  the  sale  of  a  dangerous  commodity,  though 
patented  by  the  Federal  Government. 

"  The  power  of  eminent  domain  and  the  police  power  are  two  distinct 
things.  Property  cannot  be  taken  for  the  public  use  without  compensa- 
tion, but  the  prohibition  of  the  use  of  property  for  a  specific  purpose 
deemed  injurious  to  society  is  not  such  a  taking.  The  right  of  a  State  to 
abate  a  nuisance  under  its  police  power  should  not  be  burdened  with  a 
condition  requiring  compensation  to  be  made.  A  State  can  declare  brew- 
eries, distilleries,  and  saloons  nuisances  and  abate  them  by  proceedings  in 
equity  where  the  defendant  cannot  have  a  jury  trial." 

The  National  Prohibition  party,  which  was  organized  in 
Chicago  in  September,  1869,  has  active  representatives  in  every 
State  and  Territory  of  the  Union.  It  publishes  a  large,  well- 
edited  almanac,  "  The  Political  Prohibitionist,"  many  leaflets, 
tracts,  and  pamphlets.  Of  the  various  journals  which  support 
its  platform,  the  most  widely  circulated  is  The  Voice,  of  New 
York. 

Opposed  to  the  Prohibitionists  stand  the  advocates  of  High 


THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  II 

License.  They  do  not  take  so  revolutionary  a  view  of  the  liquor 
question.  Certain  of  them  use  alcoholic  beverages  a..  \  find 
themselves  none  the  worse.  They  would  discriminate  between 
use  and  abuse,  and  between  comparatively  harmless  beer  and 
wine  and  decidedly  baneful  whiskey  and  gin.  In  this  camp  are 
numbered  many  who  hold  the  Prohibitionist  position  to  be  the 
extreme  one  inevitable  to  reformers  who  narrow  down  their 
observation  to  any  single  evil  or  vice  ;  who  maintain  that  the 
comparative  conspicuousness  of  drunkenness  has  led  to  an  ex- 
aggerated impression  of  its  prevalence  and  of  its  enormity, 
whilst  the  benefit  enjoyed  by  those  who  use  liquor  without 
excess  is  left  out  of  view.  Another  group  of  the  advocates  for 
high  license  are  teetotallers,  some  of  whom  regard  their  measure 
as  a  step  in  the  direction  of  the  ultimate  suppression  they  de- 
sire. All,  however,  agree  that  for  the  present  a  restrictive  policy 
is  best,  and  that  taxes  very  muck  higher  than  those  now  generally 
levied  should  be  placed  upon  saloons,  to  the  end  not  only  that 
they  may  bear  a  more  equitable  share  of  the  public  burdens 
they  create,  but  that  incidentally  their  number  may  be  reduced. 
They  maintain  that,  granting  it  to  be  desirable  that  the  com- 
munity be  freed  from  the  trade  in  liquor,  those  who  wish  this 
absolute  banishment  are  much  too  small  a  minority  in  the  nation, 
or  in  most  localities,  to  have  their  way.  Therefore  the  political 
view  must  limit  the  ethical  or  reformatory,  for  the  practical 
question  is  less  what  ought  to  be  done  than  what  can  be  done. 
Expressing  themselves  dissatisfied  with  the  results  of  prohibitory 
legislation,  they  turn  the  Prohibitionist  argument  around,  and 
say  that  to  enact  a  law  ahead  of  public  sentiment  is  only  to 
have  law  disregarded  and  brought  into  disrepute.  They  would 
distinguish  between  the  moral  reformers,  whose  mission  is  to 
set  up  an  absolute  standard  of  conduct  and  demand  conformity 
to  it,  and  the  business  of  a  Legislature,  which  is  to  enact  such 
statutes  as  the  public  sentiment  of  the  community  will  enforce  ; 
for  law  is  but  the  voice  of  the  community's  conscience,  and  the 


12  THE   LIQUOR  QUESTION"  IN  POLITICS. 

moral  power  in  a  State  or  nation  is  not  to  be  measured  by  the 
voice  but  by  the  conscience  behind  it.  They  adduce  the  wide- 
spread breach  of  laws  against  liquor-selling  on  Sundays  as 
proof  that  already  there  is  more  liquor-legislntion,  of  a  thor- 
oughly excellent  kind,  than  is  put  into  effect.  As  showing  how 
few  of  the  American  people  follow  the  flag  of  Prohibition,  the 
Presidential  election  returns  of  November,  1888,  are  cited,  exhib- 
iting a  Prohibition  vote  of  but  249,506  in  a  grand  total  of  11,- 
388,038  ballots.  And  this  when  so  eminent  a  Prohibitionist  as 
the  late  Mr.  John  B.  Gough  used  to  say  that  three-fourths  of  the 
nation  must  sanction  the  laws  for  which  he  strove  if  they  were 
to  be  really  effective.  The  smallness  of  the  Prohibition  vote  for 
President  as  cited,  falling  as  it  did  vastly  below  the  aggregate 
State  votes  on  loca!  Prohibition  issues,  shows  that  many  Prohi- 
bitionists, believing  that  their  party  candidate  could  not  succeed, 
cast  their  ballots  for  Mr.  Harrison  or  Mr.  Cleveland. 

It  may  now  be  fitting  briefly  to  review  some  of  the  most  im- 
portant experiments  in  legislating  on  the  liquor  trade,  and  first 
those  in  prohibition  : 

Of  the  States  Maine  was  the  first  to  adopt  prohibition,  in  1851. 
During  1856  and  1857  license  was  tried,  but  with  the  exception 
of  those  years,  prohibition — now  constitutional — has  been  the 
law.  Investigation  shows  that  in  the  rural  communities  of  the 
State,  where  public  sentiment  sustains  prohibition,  the  measure 
is  successful.  It  is  otherwise  in  the  large  towns  and  seaports, 
such  as  Portland,  Bangor,  and  Bath,  where  proximity  to  the 
Canadian  border  and  to  Boston  renders  enforcement  difficult. 
Its  advocates  allege  that  the  political  party  in  power  is  afraid  to 
enforce  the  law  for  fear  of  antagonizing  the  liquor  interest  in 
national  contests.  On  the  ground  of  such  experiences  is  chiefly 
based  the  platform  of  the  national  prohibitory  party,  which 
aims  to  be  free  from  compromising  alliances  with  any  other  po- 
litical organization.  Governor  Robie  in  1885,  Governor  Bod- 
well  in  1887,  and  Governor  Marble  in  1888,  concur  in  testifying 


THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  13 

that  in  three-fourths  to  four-fifths  of  the  State  prohibition  is  fact 
as  well  as  law,  and  is  effective  in  reducing  crime  and  promoting 
prosperity. 

Vermont's  prohibitory  law,  now  constitutional  as  well  as 
statutory,  dates  from  1852.  Its  enforcement  is  less  satisfactory 
than  that  of  Maine,  the  Prohibitionists  complaining  not  only  of 
the  insincerity  and  supineness  of  the  politicians  in  power,  but 
also  of  the  lowness  of  fines  and  penalties  imposed  upon  offenders. 

In  New  Hampshire  prohibition  became  law  in  1855,  affecting, 
however,  the  sale,  not  the  manufacture  of  liquor.  One  of  the 
largest  breweries  in  the  country  is  profitably  operated  at  Ports- 
mouth. 

Of  the  New  England  States,  R'  ode  Island  was  the  fourth  and 
last  to  adopt  prohibition,  making  it  constitutional  in  1886. 
Three-fourths  of  the  population  is  in  the  county  containing  the 
cities  of  Providence  and  Pawtucket,  so  that  the  law  is  su'^jected 
to  an  extreme  strain.  With  very  imperfect  enforcement  ,ne  fol- 
lowing contrast  in  Providence  is  exhibited  : 

Arrests  for  offences  growing  out  of  liquor  traffic  in  1885, 
under  license,  4194.     Ditto  in  18865  under  prohibition,  2597. 

Rhode  Island's  Legislature  has  recently  voted  for  the  resub- 
mission of  prohibition  to  the  people. 

While  of  late  years  the  tide  of  prohibition  sentiment  has 
somewhat  ebbed  in  the  East,  it  has  gathered  strength  in  the 
West.  Kansas  adopted  prohibition  into  its  Constitution  in  1880, 
the  measure  going  into  force  the  next  year.  An  amendment 
increasing  its  stringency  was  enacted  in  1887,  and  the  statute 
granting  municipal  suffrage  to  women  is  claimed  to  have  tended 
toward  the  efficient  administration  of  the  law.  However,  with 
estimates  of  population  differing  very  widely,  it  is  impossible  to 
arrive  at  any  fairly  definite  conclusion  as  to  the  effect  of  prohi- 
bition on  crime  in  this  State.  The  preponderance  of  testimony 
is  that  the  measure  is  fairly  well  enforced  and  that  it  proves 
beneficial. 


14  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS . 

Iowa  adopted  statutory  prohibition  in  1884,  strengthened 
by  amendments  in  1886,  The  law  is  not  effective  in  restricting 
the  sale  of  liquor  by  druggists.  In  the  large  towns  having  a 
German  population  the  law  has  been  strenuously  resisted.  At 
the  close  of  1887  information  was  gathered  from  sheriffs  and 
other  county  officers  throughout  the  State  with  regard  to  the 
working  of  the  prohibitory  law.  Out  of  99  counties  98  reports 
were  received  to  the  effect  that  in  74  counties  the  majority  of 
the  people  favored  prohibition.  Of  85  reporting  as  to  the  suc- 
cess of  the  law,  71  could  speak  favorably,  14  otherwise.  As  to 
its  effect  on  crime  74  reports  came  in,  60  to  say  that  it  had 
caused  a  decrease,  14  to  say  that  no  change  was  observable. 
Sixty  county  officers  were  heard  from  as  to  prohibition's  effect 
on  agricultural  and  commercial  interests.  Of  these  26  stated 
that  it  had  been  good,  32  that  it  had  had  no  perceptible  influence 
one  way  or  other,  2  that  it  had  been  bad. 

Prohibition,  more  or  less  strict,  is  enforceable  by  local  option 
in  the  counties  of  Alabama,  Arkansas,  California,  Connecticut, 
Florida,  Georgia,  Illinois,  Kentucky,  Louisiana,  Michigan,  Mis- 
sissippi, Missouri,  North  Carolina,  Ohio,  Pennsylvania,  South 
Carolina,  Texas,  Virginia,  West  Virgmia,  and  the  Territories  of 
Dakota  and  Washington.  Prohibition  can  be  obtained  by  favor 
of  local  authorities  in  Colorado  and  Oregon  ;  in  Delaware 
through  the  discretion  of  the  court,  or  through  so  strong  an 
anti-saloon  [sentiment  in  a  locality  as  to  prevent  an  applicant 
from  finding  the  requisite  number  of  persons  to  sign  his  petition. 
Prohibition  is  indirectly  obtainable  in  Indiana,  Maryland,  and 
Nebraska,  through  provisions  of  the  license  law.  At  the  close 
of  1888,  twenty  five  of  the  States  had  laws  on  their  statute- 
books  requiring  that  instruction  as  to  the  nature  of  alcohol,  and 
as  to  the  alcohol  habit,  be  imparted  in  the  public  schools. 
Tennessee  has  a  law  that  no  saloon  shall  exist  within  four  miles 
of  a  school,  and  as  any  five  persons  can  charter  a  school,  prohi- 
bition may  be  introduced  in  the  most  sparsely  settled  districts 


•     THE  LIQUOR  QUiirTIOX  TN  POLITICS.  1$ 

of  the   State.     The   Legislatures  of  New   jTsey,  Minnesota, 
and  Wisconsin  have  recently  voted  for  repeal  of  local  option. 

Massachusetts,  under  a  local  option  law,  has  had  some  remark- 
able experiences.  In  Cambridge  prohibition  has  been  tried 
since  May,  1887  ;  the  arrests  for  all  causes  were  1699  in  1886, 
1469  in  1888  ;  for  assault,  250  in  1886,  163  in  1888  ;  for  drunken- 
ness, 723  in  1886,  805  in  1887,  and  653  in  1888.  Prohibition  is 
enforced  fearlessly,  and  on  being  submitted  a  second  time  to  the 
people  its  results  have  won  an  increased  indorsement  at  the 
polls.  Tramps  lodging  in  the  police  stations  have  fallen  off  one- 
third  in  number,  and  there  is  an  e\ident  improvement  in  the 
condition  of  the  poor  since  the  adoption  of  a  no-license  policy. 
Whereas  in  November,  1886,  there  were  74  arrests  for  causes 
other  than  drunkenness  ;  in  November,  1888,  after  18  months' 
prohibition,  there  were  but  36  such  arrests.  Cambridge  adjoins 
Boston,  and  during  the  periods  above  mentioned,  the  latter  city 
granted  one  license  to  every  263  population.  How  many  citi- 
zens of  Cambridge  resorted  to  Boston  to  buy  liquor  is  an  ele- 
ment in  the  case  not  to  be  ascertained  or  even  conjectured.  On 
April  22  last  prohibition  was  submitted  to  the  people  of  Massa- 
chusetts at  the  polls  and  defeated  by  44,000  votes,  only  64  per 
cent,  as  many  votes  being  polled  as  on  the  ballot  for  President, 
November,  1888.  On  May  i  a  high-license  law  came  into  force 
which,  as  an  alternative  to  prohibition  under  local  option,  pro- 
vides that  in  all  towns  and  cities  voting  to  grant  licenses,  the  pro- 
portion shall  be  one  for  each  thousand  as  ascertained  by  the  last 
preceding  national  or  state  census,  except  in  the  city  of  Boston, 
where  one  license  may  be  granted  for  each  five  hundred  of  pop- 
ulation. In  towns  having  an  increase  of  resident  population 
during  the  summer  months,  the  selectmen  may,  during  the  month 
of  June,  cause  a  census  to  be  taken,  and  may  grant  one  license 
to  each  five  hundred  of  population,  to  take  effect  on  the  fifteenth 
day  of  June  and  expire  on  the  fifteenth  day  of  September  fol- 
lowing ;  provided  always  that  the  town  at  its  last  annual  town 


l6  THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

meeting  has  voted  for  license.  The  minimum  fees  established 
for  the  State  are  :  For  a  license  of  the  first  class,  $1000  ;  second 
or  third  class,  $250;  fourth  class,  $300;  fifth  class,  $150; 
sixth  class,  $1. 

The  scale  of  licenses  which  went  into  effect  in  Boston  on 
May  I,  for  the  year  beginning  with  that  date,  is  as  follows  : 

-'   For  licenses  to  sell  all  kinds  of  intoxicating  liquors,  to  be  drunk  on  the 
premises : 

1st  class.  A,  Innholders |i ,500.00 

B,  Innholders 1,200.00 

Common  victuallers 1,000.00 

To  sell  malt  liquors,  cider,  and  light  wines,  containing  not  more  than 
15  per  cent,  of  alcohol,  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises  : 

2d  and  3d  class.  Common  victuallers $500.00 

To  sell  all  kinds  of  liquors,  not  to  be  drunk  on  the  premises  : 

4th  class.  Grocers $300.00 

A,  Wholesale  dealers  (only  to  be  issued  in 
conjunction  with  a  first-class  victualler 
license) 300.00 

B,  Wholesale  dealers i  ,000.00 

Distillers i  ,000.00 

5th  class,  Bottlers 500.00 

Brewers i  ,000.00 

6th  class.  Special  druggists'  licenses i.oo 

Special  club  licenses 50.00 

Licenses  cannot  be  transferred  during  the  year  from  one  person  to  an- 
other. 

During  the  preceding  year  the  licenses  averaged  but  46  per 
cent,  as  much.  Innholders,  class  A,  paid  $800  ;  class  B,  $500  ; 
and  common  victuallers,  $350.  The  highest  fee  in  the  remain- 
der of  the  list  was  that  charged  wholesale  dealers  selling  over 
$20,000  worth  per  annum,  $450. 

Prior  to  the  defeat  of  the  proposed  prohibition  amend- 
ment to  the  Constitution  in  Massachusetts  in  April  the  question 
had  been  very  earnestly  and  fully  discussed  by  the  people  for  two 


THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  i? 

years,  and  two  successive  Legislatures  had  endorsed  the  measure. 
Cambridge,  which  voted  for  No  License  in  December,  1888,  by 
a  majority  of  600,  Voted  against  the  amendment  I)y  a  majority 
of  2600.  Newton,  which  carried  No  License  in  Deceml)er,  1888, 
by  1 2 10  votes,  gave  a  majority  of  50  against  the  amendment. 
All  the  counties  but  four  voted  against  it,  and  all  the  cities  ex- 
cept Somerville.  The  plea  which  had  most  effect  in  the  cam- 
paign was  that  it  is  wrong  for  the  prohibitory  sections  of  a  State 
to  attempt  to  force  their  law  upon  non-prohibitory  sections  ;  that 
even  if  a  clear  majority  of  every  section  or  district  desired  pro- 
hibition, it  should  be  enacted  in  the  form  of  statute,  subject  to 
,^     prompt  repeal  in  case  public  sentiment  so  demands  ;  not  as  a 

;/  constitutional  amendment,  which  might  outlast  public  sentiment 

in  its  favor  ;  that,  farthermore,  the  Constitution  is  an  instrument 
for  the  expression  of  fundamental  law,  of  which  liquor  legislation 
is  no  part.  The  Prohibitionists  charge  their  defeat  to  the  apathy 
or  treachery  of  political  allies  upon  whom  they  had  counted,  and 
also  to  the  heading  off  the  main  issue  by  a  high-license  law. 
High  license  has  become  law  in  many  States  of  the  Union 
•  .  within  the  past  ten  years.  In  Illinois  the  fee  for  a  liquor  or 
beer  license  is  $500.  In  Chicago  the  measure  has  increased  the 
revenue  from  $195,490  in  1882,  under  low  license,  to  $1,972,021 
in  1887,  under  high  license.  In  the  same  time  the  saloons  have 
increased  in  number  from  3759  to  3944.  In  the  interval  arrests 
for  drunkenness  and  disorder  have  increased  53  per  cent,,  and 
the  total  number  of  arrests  increased  41  per  cent.  Estimates 
as  to  the  growth  of  population  between  1882  and  1887  vary 
from  35  to  40  per  cent. 

In  Minnesota  a  license  costs  $1000  in  cities  having  a  popula- 
tion of  10,000  or  more  ;  $500  in  other  cities.  Minneapolis  in 
1883  had  an  estimated  population  of  90,000,  and  with  a  li- 
cense fee  of  $100  there  was  one  saloon  to  every  167  inhabi- 
tants.    In  1885,  with  an  ascertained  population  of  120,000,  the 

ir  license  fee  raised  to  $500,  and  a  restriction  of  saloons  to  the 


l8  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

business  centre,  they  were  reduced  to  298,  one  for  every  432 
inhabitants.  In  1888,  with  an  estimated  population  of  180,000 
and  a  fee  of  $1000,  the  salouns  fell  in  number  to  230,  one  for 
every  782  inhabitants.  The  arraignments  for  drunkenness,  ex- 
cluding cases  of  disorderly  conduct,  were  1752  in  1885,  ^%^  *" 
1886,  and  2619  in  1887. 

Nebraska  taxes  saloons  in  cities  $1000  ;  saloons  elsewhere 
$500  ;  bonds  are  required  to  insure  that  no  liquor  shall  be  sold  to 
drunkards  or  minors  ;  the  law  forbids  any  concealment  of  a  bar, 
by  screens  or  otherwise,  and  forbids  treating.  In  the  cities, 
Omaha  especially,  the  latter  provisions  of  law  are  not  enforced. 
On  what  are  probably  fairly  correct  estimates  of  population,  the 
penitentiary  commitments  in  1887  were  28  pe:  cent,  more  in 
Nebraska  than  in  prohibiting  Iowa.  In  Omaha,  while  saloons 
under  high  license  have  diminished  proportionately  to  popula- 
tion one-half,  the  license  money,  which  goes  to  the  common- 
school  fund,  has  increased  fivefold.  The  arrests,  however,  for 
drunkenness  in  1888  were  2450,  a  higher  ratio  than  those  of 
either  Chicago  or  New  York.  Nebraska  has  tried  high  license 
longer  than  any  other  State,  its  law  dating  from  1881.  When 
the  measure  was  introduced  in  the  Legislature  the  liquor  interest 
opposed  it  bitterly,  expecting  injury  from  it.  Experience,  how- 
ever, has  proved  this  fear  to  have  been  groundless.  In  view  of 
the  agitation  for  prohibition  in  1887,  two  circulars  were  issued 
in  January  of  that  year  by  Peter  E.  Her,  president.  Willow 
Springs  Distilling  Co.,  and  Metz  &  Brother,  brewers,  of  Omaha, 
both  being  addressed  to  their  customers  and  friends.  These 
circulars  state  that  high  license  has  not  lessened  the  consump- 
tion of  liquor  in  the  State,  has  placed  the  trade  in  fewer  and 
more  responsible  hands,  that  the  measure  is  preferable  to  low 
license,  and  is  an  effective  bar  to  prohibition.  An  active  agita- 
tion for  constitutional  prohibition  is  now  in  progress  in  Nebraska. 

Missouri's  law,  affecting  State  and  county  licenses  only,  fixes 
the  minimum  fee  at  $500  and  the  maximum  at  $1200,  the 


THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  Ip 

county  courts  having  discretion  within  these  limits — a  discretion 
which  in  many  cases  gives  them  power  practically  to  prohibit. 
Incorporated  cities  and  towns  can  fix  their  additional  tax  at 
from  $ioo  to  $500.  Railroads  and  steamboats  are  denied  the 
right  to  sell  liquor  under  any  conditions.  In  St.  Louis,  where  a 
license  is  now  seven  times  more  costly  than  formerly,  the  arrests 
for  drunkenness  were  4112  in  1887  as  compared  with  3500  in 
1882,  and  arrests  for  offences  of  every  kind,  15,217  as  com- 
pared with  14,000.  The  population  is  estimated  to  have  in- 
creased at  least  20  per  cent,  in  the  mean  time. 

In  Michigan  the  tax  for  a  retail  liquor  license  is  $300  ;  $500 
on  a  wholesale  or  retail  liquor  license,  and  $200  on  the  business 
of  selling  malt  liquors  at  wholesale  or  retail.  The  existing 
number  of  saloons  is  estimated  at  less  than  one-half  as  many  as 
those  which  would  exist  were  low  license  in  force. 

In  New  Jersey  a  license  to  sell  either  beer  or  liquor,  or  both, 
costs  $250  in  cities  of  over  10,000  population  ;  $150  in  cities 
between  3000  and  10,000  in  population  ;  $100  elsewhere. 

Pennsylvania  charges  $500  for  licenses  in  the  larger  cities, 
$300  in  the  smaller  cities,  $150  in  boroughs,  $75  in  towns. 
It  restricts  applicants  to  native  or  naturalized  citizens,  denies  a 
license  to  any  man  who  has  been  convicted  of  crime  ;  it  requires 
an  applicant  to  be  of  known  sobriety  and  good  character  ;  he  is 
to  be  the  sole  and  bona  fide  proprietor  of  the  saloon  for  which 
he  asks  a  license,  and  it  must  be  shown  that  such  saloon  is 
necessary  for  the  convenience  of  the  neighborhood,  and  that  he 
has  no  interest  in  any  other  saloon.  He  must  give  as  bonds- 
men two  reputable  freeholders  residing  in  his  ward,  borough,  or 
township,  each  owning  at  least  $2000  in  unencumbered  real 
estate  and  qualifying  to  that  amount.  No  manufacturer  of 
liquors  can  be  such  bondsman,  nor  can  any  bondsman  be  ac- 
cepted for  more  than  one  saloon-keeper.  These  restrictions, 
rigorously  enforced,  have  broken  up  the  practice  whereby  a 
brewer  or  distiller  could  virtually  own  and  operate  a  score  or 


ao     '  THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  , 

more  saloons.  The  Brooks  law,  as  it  is  called,  took  effect  on 
June  I,  1888  ;  the  following  figures  show  the  results  in  Phila- 
delphia : 

Commitments  to  County  Prison  in  corresponding  months  of 
1887  and  1888  : 

1887.  1888.  Decrease  in  1888. 

June 2,737  1,563  1. 174 

July 2,728  1,645  1,083 

August 2,736  1,817  ■             919 

September 2,755  1.904  851 

October 2,598  1,526  1,072 

Total 13.554  8,455  5.099 

Commitments  to  House  of  Correction  in  corresponding  months 
of  1887  and  1888: 

1887.  i388.  Decrease  in  1888. 

June 490  320  170 

July 502  281  221 

August 500  405  95 

September 540  380  160 

October 631  437  194 


Total 2,663  1,823  840 

The  law  prohibits  under  severe  penalties  the  opening  of  saloons 
on  Sunday. 

The  number  of  Sunday  commitments  to  the  Philadelphia 
County  Prison,  as  officially  reported  on  the  following  Monday 
mornings,  were  : 

June  I,  1887,  to  Nov.  i,  1887 679 

June  I,  1888,  to  Nov.  i,  1888 194 

Decrease  under  the  restraining  act 485 

The  commitments  of  women  were  : 

June  I,  1887,  to  Nov.  i,  1887 74 

June  I,  1888,  to  Nov.  I,  1888 21 

Decrease 53 

Comparing  the  total  number  of  arrests  in  1888,  the  first  year 
of  high  license,  with  those  in  1887,  shows,  in  Pittsburg,  an  in- 
crease of  21  percent.,  in  Allegheny, of  13  percent.,andScranton, 
of  10  per  cent.  In  arrests  for  drunkenness  the  percentages  of 
increase  were  respectively  10,  12,  and  5.     The  brewers  and  dis- 


THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  21 

tillers  of  Pennsylvania  maintain  that  they  find  little  or  no  falling 
off  in  the  demand  for  their  products  as  a  result  of  high  license. 
On  June  i8  the  people  of  the  State  are  to  decide  at  the  polls  for 
or  against  a  prohibitory  amendment  to  the  Constitution. 

In  December,  1887,  Atlanta,  Georgia,  exchanged  prohibition 
(never  well  enforced)  for  high  license,  placing  the  fee  at  $1000. 
The  arrests  for  drunkenness  during  the  four  months  ending 
March  31,  1888,  were  818  as  against  273  for  the  corresponding 
period  ending  March  31,  1887. 

In  New  York  City  a  trial  of  comparatively  high  license  was 
made  between  1866  and  1870.  Instead  of  nominal  fees,  a  li- 
cense for  liquor  was  placed  at  the  minimum  of  $250,  and  that 
for  beer  at  the  minimum  of  |ioo.  The  effect  of  the  law  in  its 
first  year  of  operation  was  to  reduce  the  number  of  saloons  25 
per  cent,  and  increase  revenue  from  $9690  in  1865  to  $993,347 
in  1866.  It  was  made  clear  that  in  consideration  of  freedom 
from  civic  taxes,  the  liquor  dealers  were  required  to  contribute 
liberally  to  the  corrupt  political  forces  controlling  municipal 
affairs.  Until  high  license  was  repealed  in  1870,  by  William  M. 
Tweed  and  his  abettors,  the  ratio  of  arrests  for  drunkenness  was 
much  smaller  than  before  high  license  was  enacted  ;  every  year 
through  enforcing  observance  of  Sunday  closing,  some  8000 
fewer  arrests  were  meide  of  intoxicated  persons  on  that  day. 

At  present.  May,  1889,  the  license  fees  in  New  York  City 
are  as  follows  :  For  a  first-class  hotel,  $250  ;  for  a  second-class 
hotel,  $200.  To  sell  liquors,  wines,  ales,  and  beer,  to  be  drank 
on  the  premises,  $200  ;  if  for  ale  and  beer  only,  $30  ;  ale,  beer, 
and  wines,  $50.  Storekeepers'  licenses  vary  from  $50  to  $250, 
as  their  sales  may  vary  from  $2500  to  $10,000  per  annum. 
Among  the  rules  of  the  Board  of  Excise,  with  whom  rests  the 
licensing  authority,  are  the  following  : 

No  increase  in  the  number  of  places  now  licensed  is  permitted  ; 
a  license  is  not  issued  for  a  new  place  except  upon  the  closing 
of  an  existing  place.     A  license  is  not  issued  for  a  new  place 


22  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

adjoining  a  place  already  licensed,  or  in  the  immediate  vicinity 
of  a  church,  school-house,  hospital,  or  asylum.  Where  at  the 
intersection  of  streets  two  corners  are  already  licensed,  a  license 
will  not  be  granted  for  a  third  corner. 

A  bill  now  (May,  1889)  before  the  Legislature  of  New  York, 
prepared  by  the  Joint  Committee  on  High  License,  of  which 
committee  Hon.  Dorman  B.  Eaton  is  chairman,  and  Mr.  John 
B.  Pine  is  secretary,  proposes  the  following  changes  :  To  in- 
crease the  minimum  rate  for  a  liquor  license,  in  cities,  from 
$30  to  $300  ;  in  towns,  from  $30  to  $100.  And  to  increase 
the  minimum  rate  for  a  beer  license,  in  cities,  from  $30  to  $60  ; 
and  in  towns,  from  $30  to  $40.  The  bill  prohibits  the  granting 
of  saloon  licenses  in  excess  of  the  number  now  in  force  until 
such  number  shall  be  reduced  to  the  proportion  of  one  saloon 
to  every  500  population.  It  increases  the  amount  of  the  bond 
required  of  a  licensee  from  $250  to  $1000,  and  provides  that  his 
sureties  shall  each  qualify  in  $2000  instead  of  $500.  It  does 
not  prevent  Boards  of  Excise  where  '*  no-license  "  Commission- 
ers are  elected  from  refusing  to  grant  licenses,  permitting  a  con- 
tinuance of  the  rights  of  **  local  option  "  now  enjoyed.  The 
bill  is  declared  by  the  Joint  Committee  on  High  License  to  be  no 
more  than  a  tentative  and  preliminary  measure,  which  they  hope 
to  follow  up  with  a  thoroughly  satisfactory  High-License  Law. 

The  Voice,  of  New  York,  last  January  asked  the  Mayors  and 
Chiefs  of  Police  of  every  city  in  the  Union  of  over  10,000  inhabi- 
tants for  statistics  of  arrests.  Classing  license  fees  of  $200  and 
less  as  low,  and  fees  of  $500  and  more  as  high,  all  the  responses 
received  were  summarized  in  its  issue  of  January  24,  1889  : 

A  COMPARISON  OF  THE  PROPORTION  OF  ARRESTS  FOR  DRUNKEN- 
NESS AND  DISORDERLY  CONDUCT  IN  HIGH-LICENSE  AND  IN 
LOW-LICENSE  CITIES. 

The  following  table  compares  14  high-license  with  15  low-license  cities. 
In  the  high-license  cities  the  license  fee  ranges  between  $500  and  $1000  ; 
in  the  low-license  cities  between  $25  and  $200.  The  figures  are  for  1887. 
The  table  shows  :  First,  That  14  high-license  cities  whose  license  fee 
averages  $710  have  a  saloon  to  every  267  persons,  and  an  arrest  for 


THE  LIQUOR   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 


23 


drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct  to  every  38  persons,  which  arrests 
are  57.2  per  cent,  of  the  total  arrests.  Second,  That  15  low-license  cities 
whose  license  fee  averages  $116  have  a  saloon  to  every  170  persons,  and 
an  arrest  for  drunkenness  and  disorderly  conduct  to  every  37  persons, 
which  arrests  are  55.6  per  cent,  of  the  total  arrests.  Estimates  of  popu- 
lation, except  as  otherwise  stated,  are  from  the  report  of  Dun's  Mer- 
cantile Agency  for  1888. 


City. 

c 
0 

«.* 

3 

a 

0 

0- 

0  . 

.»  c 

0  0 

Sg 

v.S 
iJ 

f  I,OCO 

1,000 
1,000 
1,000 
1,000 

800 

600 

559 
500 
500 
500 
500 
500 
500 
200 
200 
200 
200 
200 

'25 

100 

100 

90 

84 

75 
50 
50 
50 

25 

en 

C 

8 

6 

0 

0 
0   . 

CU  4) 

C 

dO 

2 

< 

d 

y. 

n 
s 

Arrests  for  Drunk- 
enness and  Disor- 
derly Conduct. 

Population   to   one 
Arrest  for  Drunk- 
enness and  Disor- 
derly Conduct. 

Per  cent,  of  ArreKs 
for  Drunkenness  & 
Disorderly  Cond't 
to  Total  Arrests. 

if  100,000 
13,500 

{175,000 
20,000 
22,000 

1 1 75.000 

22,000 

500,000 

t 180,000 

34.500 
33.000 
25,000 
20,000 

900,<XX3 

+  1,500,000 

200,000 

+  190,000 

300,000 

80,000 

20,207 

{58,000 

{757.755 

22,j6l 

{305,000 
51.031 

+165,000 

20,000 

480,000 

21,420 

246 

'7 
240 

49 

25 

483 

+1.750 

1,100 

1.0 

140 

75 
69 
3.944 
8,016 
1,500 
1,098 
2,300 

4'-'5 
123 
160 

3.356 
86 

2,857 
650 

','OS 
92 

2,500 
204 

406 

795 
729 
408 
440 
362 

4'5 

285 
.6j 
3'3 
235 
333 
289 
228 
187 
'33 
173 
130 
188 
164 
362 
226 
260 
107 
78 
'49 
217 
192 
105 

6,12s 

733 

5,876 

1,150 

401 

7,920 

877 

'7.938 

9,400 

808 

1,983 

4'3 

554 

46,505 

81,176 

8,588 

4.401 

",925 

4.83' 

489 

2,265 

28,567 

1,112 

20,385 

2  718 

6,168 

1,268 

27,200 

667 

2,'54 
643 

3.404 
705 

.305 
3,866 

457 

10,441 

6,160 

449 

794 

4'3 

237 

27,632 

45.241 
4,957 
3. '35 
5.959 
•2,3''9 
219 
'..397 

14,030 

735 
9,368 
1,699 
',993 

9«4 
19,815 

40S 

46 
21 

5' 
28 

72 

45 
48 

48 
29 
76 

4' 

60 
84 
33 
33 
40 
61 
50 
33 
92 

42 
54 
30 

32 
30 
83 
21 
24 
52 

35 
88 
58 
61 

Galesburg 

♦  Minneapolis.. 
Joliet 

Rockford 

Kansas  City  . . . 
Bloomington  . . 

St.  r.ouis 

Detroit 

yuincy 

Peoria 

76 
49 
52 
58 
65 
55 
40 

Muskegon  . 
Saginaw  City. . 

Chicago 

New  York 

Cleveland 

Milwaukee 

Cincinnati 

Columbus 

Poughkeepsic. . 
Wilmington.. . . 

Brooklyn 

Binghamton  . . . 
San  Francisco  . 

Paterson 

Jersey  City 

Yonkers 

Baltimore 

Cohoes 

100 
43 
59 
5S 
57 
7' 
49 
49 
44 
61 

49 
66 
46 
62 
32 
73 
73 
61 

Summary. 

14  High-license 
Cities 

15  Low  license 
Cities 

2,220,000 
4, '70.774 

.'\veraKe 
License. 

$701 
116 

8,301 
24.472 

267 
170 

100,683 
201,758 

57,660 
112,259 

38 
37 

57-2 
55.6 

*  Partial  prohibition,  saloons  being  confined  to  a  particular  district. 

+  Estimated  from  half-yearly  report. 

If.  Estimates  furnished  the  World  Almanac  by  the  Mayors. 


24  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

A  review  of  the  liquor  trade  as  the  subject  of  legislation,  the 
salient  features  of  which  have  been  given  in  the  foregoing  pages, 
points  to  the  following  conclusions  : 

Waiving  consideration  of  wrong  to  the  individual  and  to  the 
State  which  it  may  be  claimed  indirectly  results  from  prohibi- 
tion's interference  with  personal  liberty,  the  crime  attributable 
to  the  sale  of  liquor  is  certainly  much  curtailed  when  prohibition 
is  enacted  and  enforced,  despite  the  obstacles  of  law  and  interest 
which  may  oppose  it,  provided  always  that  the  community  de- 
ciding for  prohibition  does  so  by  a  large  majority — of  at  least  say 
seventy-five  per  cent. — it  would  be  well  to  require  such  a 
majority  for  the  passage  of  a  suppressive  law.  To  insure  observ- 
ance of  the  law  it  is  best  that  the  community  enacting  it  be  the 
smallest  political  unit  in  a  State  ;  for  if  it  be  larger  and  of  various 
conviction  regarding  prohibition,  then  the  law  succeeds  in  one 
locality  and  fails  in  another.  It  is  vain  to  extend  the  law  beyond 
the  limits  of  territory  where  public  sentiment  demands  it  ind  will 
sustain  it.  Enforcement  in  a  particular  locality  is  always,  how- 
ever, increased  in  difficulty  when  adjoining  places  are  not  under 
prohibition.  Hence  the  Prohibitionists'  objection  to  local  option, 
that  "it  is  too  local,  and  too  optional,"  an  objection  which  has 
some  savor  of  an  impatient  wish  to  make  people  good  against 
their  will.  Local  option  is  just  in  its  operation  because  it  pro- 
vitlcs  difference  of  law  for  difference  of  circumstance.  An 
agricultural  village  or  small  town  is  not  in  the  same  case  as  a 
seaport  or  large*  city.  But  when  similarly  circumstanced  and 
adjoining  towns  vary  in  sentiment,  one  enacting  prohibition,  and 
the  other  license,  there  is  an  unavoidable  offence  to  the  feeling 
that  laws  should  be  uniform.  For  licpior-selling  to  be  innocent 
in  one  place,  and  criminal  in  another  jilace,  across  a  highway, 
strikes  people  as  unjust.  Licjuor  legislation  will  be  less  un- 
satisfactory when  a  Proliibitionist  majority  in  a  State  does  not 
overrule  a  license  majority  in  municipalities  within  its  borders. 
It  is  clear  that  prohibitory  State  legislation  has  not  seldom 


THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  2$ 

been  insincerely  enacted  as  a  party  measure  in  politics  to 
secure  the  adhesion  of  a  body  of  reformers  so  energetic  in 
their  exercise  of  influence  as  to  hold  the  balance  of  power  in  a 
State.  Nothing  else  can  explain  the  discrepancy  between  law 
and  enforcement  in  many  portions  of  the  territory  under  pro- 
hibition. At  the  Prohibition  National  Convention,  held  in 
Indianapolis,  May,  1888,  the  principle  of  woman  suffrage  was 
adopted  in  the  platform  of  the  party.  It  would  seem  to  be 
expectttd  that  women  if  enfranchised  will  vote  for  the  suppres- 
sion of  the  litjuor  traffic.  But  as  enforcement  in  that  event  will 
rest  with  a  sex  who  may  not  be  favorable  to  suppression,  the  future 
even  more  than  the  past  may  display  execution  falling  short  of 
enactment. 

While  no  form  of  legislation  on  the  licjuor  (juestion  has  proved 
as  satisfactory  as  its  advocates  desire,  the  balance  of  advantage 
seems  to  rest  with  local  option,  which  to  prohibition  couples 
the  alternative  of  high  license  instead  of  low.  Large  cities, 
always  non-prohibitory,  find  high  vastly  preferable  to  low  license. 
Experience  of  high  license  makes  it  plain  that  until  within  very 
recent  years  an  important  source  of  public  revenue  has  yielded 
vastly  less  than  it  might.  So  large  are  the  levies  receivable  from 
saloons  that  in  many  places  they  perceptibly  relieve  other  forms 
of  taxation,  which  relief  the  Prohibitionists  declare  acts  as  a  bribe 
to  block  the  progress  of  a  suppressive  policy.  High  license  works 
in  the  same  direction  with  the  forces  whicli  impel  business  to  be 
more  and  more  economically  transacted  year  by  year  by  abolish- 
ing unnecessary  duplicate  establishments  ;  bringing  trade  into 
fewer,  stronger,  and  more  responsible  hands.  Under  high  li- 
cense, saloons  usually  give  employment  to  one-half  as  many  per- 
sons as  under  low  license,  and  are  conducted  with  a  little  more 
than  one-half  as  much  total  expense.  The  question  now  arises, 
At  what  figure  should  licenses  be  placed  so  as  to  yield  the 
maximum  of  revenue?  Prior  to  1889  it  seems  to  have  been 
agreed  that  a  fee  of  not  less  than  I500  was  necessary  to  rq- 


»6  THE  LIQUOR  QUESTION  IN  POLITICS. 

Strict,  and  that  a  fee  higher  than  $1000  would  tempt  to  illicit 
trading.  This  year  Boston  has  increased  its  license  fees  to  a 
maxiniLim  limit  of  $1500  ;  a  tendency  in  the  stime  direction  is 
manifest  in  other  large  cities.  It  seems  fair  that  the  fee  should 
be  proportioned  to  the  extent  of  business,  and  this  is  pretty  ac 
curately  gauged  by  rent,  jo  that  rent  would  doubtless  serve  as 
a  basis  for  proportioning  license  fees.  In  villages  and  small 
towns  there  is  comparatively  small  variation  in  the  rentals  of 
saloons  and  liquor-stores.  In  cities,  however,  it  is  otherwise  ; 
many  which  are  leased  at  $1000  yield  but  moderate  profit,  while 
others  paying  $10,000,  $20,000,  or  even  more,  are  extremely 
lucrative.  To  charge  these  latter  concerns  no  more  than  $1000 
is  to  let  them  off  for  much  less  proportionately  than  smaller  places, 
whilst  their  proprietors  are  generally  men  of  responsibility  who 
would  not  if  they  could  evade  payment  of  an  equitable  fee, 
which  might  be  twice  to  five  times  $1000.  Politically,  high 
license  has  the  advantage  of  reducing  the  number  of  men  en- 
gaged in  saloon-keeping,  and  so  reducing  the  direct  saloon  vote. 
If  there  are  not  saloons  enough  to  give  meeting-places  for  pri- 
maries and  other  political  gatherings,  these  could  be  conducted 
soberly  and  outside  the  liquor  influence,  instead  of,  as  under 
low  license,  being  managed  almost  exclusively  by  saloon-keepers 
and  bar-tenders.  Among  the  evils  which  follow  from  high 
license,  the  Prohibitionists  assert,  is  increased  political  activity 
on  the  part  of  saloon-keepers.  It  is  said  that  in  Nebraska, 
where  high  license  has  been  enacted  longer  than  elsewhere,  the 
liquor-men  maintain  that  as  they  pay  a  large  share  of  the  ex- 
penses of  government,  they  have  a  right  to  a  large  participation 
in  it. 

With  regard  to  diminishing  the  consumption  of  liquor,  the 
expectations  generally  entertained  as  to  high  license  have  not  as 
yet  been  fulfilled.  The  opposition  to  the  measure,  in  so  far  as 
it  comes  from  saloon-keepers,  chiefly  proceeds  from  the  weaker 
of  them,  who  fear  to  be  forced  out  of  business  ;   high  license 


THE  LIQU    '^   QUESTION  IN  POLITICS.  27 

encounters  no  resistance  from  the  capitalists  engaged  in  brew- 
ing and  distilling;  their  sales  remain  littl«  disturbed  by  increase 
of  fees  for  retailing,  such  slight  falling  off  as  may  be  suffered 
being  offset  by  the  advantage  of  having  a  more  compact  and 
responsible  circle  of  customers.  While  high  license  usually  cuts 
down  the  number  of  saloons  one-half,  it  still  leaves  quite  as 
many  as  the  users  of  liquor  require.  That  a  city  block  contains 
two  saloons  instead  of  four  presents  no  appreciable  check  to  a 
patron  who  wishes  a  glass  of  beer  or  whiskey.  In  so  far  as  the 
i'icreased  profitableness  of  saloons  reduced  in  number  enables 
their  proprietors  to  make  them  more  attractive,  the  element  of 
temptation  to  patronage  is  as  strong  under  high  as  under  low 
license.  High  license,  however,  by  tending  to  increase  the  re- 
sponsibility of  li(iuor-sellers  gives  new  guarantees  for  the  obser- 
vance of  law.  The  risk  of  forfeiture  for  law-breaking  is  not 
so  likely  to  be  run  under  high  as  under  low  license. 

Restrictive  measures,  such  as  those  in  force  in  Pennsylvania 
and  New  York  City,  are  beneficial — m.easures  which  require  a 
better  standard  of  character  for  licensees,  or  which  absolutely 
limit  licenses  to  a  definite  number.  In  a  growing  community 
simply  by  refusing  additional  licenses  saloons  may  be  brought 
down  to  the  least  practicable  ratio,  while  at  the  same  time  the 
largest  obtainable  revenue  from  them  diminishes  other  taxation. 
Much  is  done  to  abate  the  evils  of  the  licpior  trade  by  the  pro- 
vision and  enforcement  of  Civil  Damages  Acts.  When  a  litpior- 
seller  is  liable  for  damages  through  the  sale  of  liquor  to  minors 
and  drunkards,  or  at  times  and  places  forbidden  by  statute,  he 
has  a  new  reason  to  make  him  respect  the  law. 


1  '  • »  I 


The  Society  for  Political  Education, 


EXECUTIVE  COMMITTEE. 

R.  R.  BowKER,  New  York,  Chairman. 
E.  M.  SheI'AKU,  New  York,  Treasurer, 
Georuk  Ilks,  New  York,  Secretary. 
"■  WORTHINGTON  C.  FoRD,  Washington.  D.  C. 
William  M.  Ivins,  New  York. 
George  Haven  Putnam,  New  York. 
A.  E.  Walradt,  New  York. 
David  A.  Wells,  Norwich,  Conn. 


ADVISORY  COMMITTEE. 

•Charles  Francis  Adams,  Boston,  Mass. 

John  H.  Ames,  Lincoln,  Neb. 

E.  D.  Barbour,  Boston,  Mass. 

A.  Sydney  Biddle,  Philadelphia,  Pa. 

George  S.  Coe,  New  York.  *. 


^•V'*-' 


B.  R.  Forman,  New  Orleans,  La. 
-,,  Gbn.  Bradley  T.  Johnson,  Baltimore,  Md.  *f 

''.•j5n'.'>         Richard  W.  Knott,  Louisville,  Ky.      «;^p>;  ;  ■ 

Franklin  MacVeagh,  Chicago,  111.  ,      T    •/ » 

Horace  Rublee,  Milwaukee.  Wis.  ,.,,  /' t."*' '^.  4  .^  ,    , 

'  •  V  f'  •■■'■^   Vf     I,' 
M.  L.   Scudder,  Jr.,  Chicago,  111.  _;^  ,/';•'   j  i       ' 

,;.,.Vl   £d\vin  Burritt  Smith,  Chicago,  111. 

j«  .     ,    .  ,,  1  Prok.  W.  G.  Sumner,  Yale  College,  New  Haven,  Conn.    '     ":'   '<':'/,* 

Andrew  D.  White,  Ithaca,  N.  Y.  ■ ',  •■    „  .  ,  ^     'r     •  '      -.^ ',  '•. 

"•'■":>■  Horace  White,  New  York.         >  .      './.'•.:'.    -  <  V"'    ^'•W>,r,    •;  ,/ ' 

F.  W.  Zeile,  San  Francisco,  Cal.  "  "V      v^  '    *      *      .'-.l^'-      K 

..-■■.*  -.':      -.       ,'  '     ■•,.■   <••■..•■    I 

■^■h'j.i  .  ■ ^ <  ..   -.  .'  ■    ■>■■  .     ■  ■; 

OFFICE  ADDRESS:  330  PEARL  STREET,  NEW  YORK.  \ /;  -    l! 


The  Society  for  Political  Education. 

PUBLICATIONS. 

The  Society  issues  for  its  members  not  fewer  than  four  tracts  In  eech  year 
upon  subjects  selected  by  the  Committee.    The  following  tracts  have  been  is9U(-<l 
and  any  not  noted  as  out  of  print  may  be  had  from  the  Secretary,    Subscrihci^ 
for  1889  are  entitled  to  tracts  beginning  with  No.  25. 


ECONOMIC   TRACTS. 

I  Atkinson  (E.).    What  ia  a  Bank?    10  cents.    (Out  of  print.) 

■i  Political  Economy  and  Fdi.itkal  Sciuncb;    A  priced  and  cUssiried  bibli«grMpny  by  Sumiicr, 
Wells,  KuKter,  Dugdaie,  and  Putnam,     a;  cents. 

( '('kit  trad,  care/ully  revitid  and  extendtd,  will  bt  fiublithtd  Octob*r,  1889  ) 

3  pRRsaNT  Political  and  Economic  Issues,  with  suf^guiitions  of  subjects  for  debate  and  fur 

essays.    10  cents.    (Out  of  print.) 

(  This  tract  will  also  bt  carefully  rivistd  and  txtindtd /or  rtitsut  Octobtr,  18S9,) 

4  Th«  Usurv  Qukstion,  by  Calvan,  Flentham,  Dana,  and  Wells,  witli  bibliographv-    as  cents. 

s  C0URT018  (Alphonse),    Political  Economy  in  One  Lesson.     Translated  by  W.  C,  Ford,    lo  tents, 

6  White  (Horace).     Money  and  Its  Substitutes,    ascents. 

7  WiiiTii  (A.  D  ).    Paper-Money  Inflation  in  France:  a  History  and  Its  Application.   2$  cents. 
H  Whitridgb  (Frederick  W.).    The  Caucus  System.     10  cent*. 

(^  Canfibld  (James  H.).    Taxation.    15  cents.  « 

10  BowKKK  (R.  R.).    Of  Work  and  Wealth  ;  a  Summary  of  Rconomics.    15  cents. 

11  Grrhn  (George  Walton).     Repudiation.     30  cents. 

la  Shbi-akd  (E.  M.).    The  Work  of  a  Social  Teacher  ;  Memorial  of  Richard  L.  Dugdale.     10  cents. 
I J  Ford  (W.  C).    The  Standard  Silver  Dollar  and  the  Coinage  Law  of  1878.    ao  cents. 

14  Shbparu  (Edwd.  M.).    The  Compiititive  Test  and  the  Civil  Service  of  States  and  Cities.    25 

cents, 

15  Richardson  (H.  W.).     The  Standard  Dollar,    ascents. 

16  GiFKKN  (Robert).    The  Progress  of  the  Working  Classes  in  the  Last  Half  Century,    ascents 

17  Foster  (W.  R.).     References  to  the  History  of  Presidential  Administrations— 178U-1885.    as 

cents. 

t8  Hall  (C.  H.).     Patriotism  and  National  Defence.     15  cents. 

19  Atkinson  (E.).    The  Railway,  the  Farn-  t,  and  the  Public.    15  cents. 

10  Webks  (Jos.  D.).     I>abor  Differences  anc'  Their  Settlement.    25  cents. 

ai  BowKBR  (R.  R.).    Primer  for  Political  Eiiucation.    15  cents. 

.2a  BowKKit  (R.  R.).    Civil  Service  Examinations.     15  cents. 

a3  Bayles(J.  C).    The  Shop  Council,    is  cents. 

34  Williams  (Talcotc).     Labor  a  Hundred  Years  Ago.     15  cents. 

as  Electoral  Reform,  with  the  Massachusetts  Ballot  Reform  Act,  and  New  York  (Saxton)  Bill. 
15  cents. 

a6  I  LBS  (George).    The  Liquor  Question  in  Politics.     15  cents. 

Nos.  27  and  28,  as  above  stated,  will  be  revised  and  extended  reissues  of  Nos. 
2  and  3, 

GEORGE  ILES,  Secretary, 

330  Pearl  St.,  N»w  York, 


